Publication: 汉泰存现句及其变换式的对比分析
Submitted Date
Received Date
Accepted Date
Issued Date
2012
Copyright Date
Announcement No.
Application No.
Patent No.
Valid Date
Resource Type
Edition
Resource Version
Language
cn
File Type
No. of Pages/File Size
ISBN
ISSN
eISSN
DOI
Scopus ID
WOS ID
Pubmed ID
arXiv ID
item.page.harrt.identifier.callno
Other identifier(s)
Journal Title
汉学研究
Journal of Sinology
วารสารจีนวิทยา
Journal of Sinology
วารสารจีนวิทยา
Volume
6
Issue
Edition
Start Page
23
End Page
49
Access Rights
Access Status
Rights
Rights Holder(s)
Physical Location
Bibliographic Citation
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Title
汉泰存现句及其变换式的对比分析
Alternative Title(s)
The Comparison of Presentative Sentences and their transformations in Chinese and Thai
Author(s)
Author’s Affiliation
Author's E-mail
Editor(s)
Editor’s Affiliation
Corresponding person(s)
Creator(s)
Compiler
Advisor(s)
Illustrator(s)
Applicant(s)
Inventor(s)
Issuer
Assignee
Other Contributor(s)
Series
Has Part
Abstract
本文运用句法、语义以及认知方面的理论对汉泰两种语言中的存现句按照表处所义的部分、动词部分、名词部分、存现句的变换句式等分别进行了分析比较。得出的总体认识是：泰语的时体标记“了”及数量词还没有像语那样发展成为一种有界化的语法手段，泰语存现句中谓语动词的有界化的程度不如汉语，因而对时体标记和数量词的强制性要求，不像汉语那么强烈。泰语变换式所包括的动词范围比汉语更为广泛。汉语存现句变换式"(有)NP+V+在+NPL”与泰语原有的“动词前置句”顺序相同。此外，通过考察汉语母语者与泰国学生存现句及其变换式的使用情况，发现泰国学生更习惯使用“有”字句和变换式。我们认为原因是：1.受到了泰语“动词前置句”的影响。2.泰语存现句包括的动词范围远小于语。3.受泰语介词结构必居课语之后的限制，处所词为起点或终点时，不宜使用存现句。
In this paper, syntactic, semantic, and cognitive theories are used to compare and analyze Chinese and Thai presentative sentences, with respect to their transformations of three basic components: location or space, verb predicate, and noun predicate. The following conclusion is reached: in transformations of presentative Thai sentences, there is a much greater scope of verb choice and usage. The word order of the transformative structure,"(有)NP+V+在+NPL"in Chinese is the same as the Thai sentences with the verb placement in front. In Thai, the time marker "Iɛɛw", measure words, and numeral quantifiers have not developed in the same manner as Chinese bounded markers which are all grammatically required in presentative sentences. The usage of bounded markers in Thai presentative sentences are optional, and are not required to the same degree in Chinese presentative sentences. In addition, by examining Chinese native speakers and Thai learners of Chinese, and their usage and transformation of presentative sentences, we found that Thai students are more accustomed to using“有”in presentative sentences and their transformations. Our explanations are: 1) In certain Thai sentences, “有” is the verb which is placed at the beginning of the sentence, 2) the scope of verb usage in Thai presentative sentences are much less than in Chinese, 3) in Thai, prepositions are grammatically placed after the verb predicate, with the location modifier indicating the point of departure or arrival placed at the end of the sentence. Therefore, Thai is not amenable to forming presentative sentences.
In this paper, syntactic, semantic, and cognitive theories are used to compare and analyze Chinese and Thai presentative sentences, with respect to their transformations of three basic components: location or space, verb predicate, and noun predicate. The following conclusion is reached: in transformations of presentative Thai sentences, there is a much greater scope of verb choice and usage. The word order of the transformative structure,"(有)NP+V+在+NPL"in Chinese is the same as the Thai sentences with the verb placement in front. In Thai, the time marker "Iɛɛw", measure words, and numeral quantifiers have not developed in the same manner as Chinese bounded markers which are all grammatically required in presentative sentences. The usage of bounded markers in Thai presentative sentences are optional, and are not required to the same degree in Chinese presentative sentences. In addition, by examining Chinese native speakers and Thai learners of Chinese, and their usage and transformation of presentative sentences, we found that Thai students are more accustomed to using“有”in presentative sentences and their transformations. Our explanations are: 1) In certain Thai sentences, “有” is the verb which is placed at the beginning of the sentence, 2) the scope of verb usage in Thai presentative sentences are much less than in Chinese, 3) in Thai, prepositions are grammatically placed after the verb predicate, with the location modifier indicating the point of departure or arrival placed at the end of the sentence. Therefore, Thai is not amenable to forming presentative sentences.